ST0001-CS020903�i-03 I
Lc v- 's av-
5J zaVA
o�� CoU�1 ev S dam, 51�cw,n tv1 W
September 3, 2002
Mr. Ken Griffin, P.E.
Director of Engineering & Public Works
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
RE: Creekview Drive and Freeport Parkway Project
Contract No: ST 00 -01
Dear Ken:
Per your request, Schrickel, Rollins and Associates (SRA) has reviewed eight
separate letters sent to the City from Infrastructure Services Inc. (ISI) dated August 14,
2002. In these letters, ISI requests additional compensation for extra work performed for
the referenced project. We have numbered the letters herein for reference purposes.
The first five letters request additional time and money for issues related to
construction phasing:
Letter No. 1: Temporary Roads $14,286.53
Letter No. 2: General Conditions $52
Letter No. 3: Barricade Maintenance $9
Letter No. 4: Concrete Labor Inefficiency $30
Letter No. 5: Extra Mobilization $23,332.84
In our opinion, no construction phasing work was required by the City beyond the
scope as defined in the Bid Documents. The description of Pay Item #127 states that two -
way traffic shall be maintained on all roadways under construction at all times unless
otherwise approved by the owner. No extra payment shall be made for this purpose
regardless of the number, duration or other variations for the Contractor's barricades and
sequencing unless the contract is changed following the receipt of bids. It is our
understanding that the Contractor was not instructed by the Owner to phase the project in
any way.
Letter No. 6: Temporary Roads $18,041.01
This letter states that: "ISI was required to relocate the stockpile, previously
relocated, and cut out the existing berms to install the corrected sidewalk." There are two
separate issues involved in this request. The first issue is the stockpile. The Contractor
was required per Addendum No. 1 to relocate, "Only the portion of the stockpile that is
located within the Creekview Drive project limits ". The stockpile was relocated during
initial excavation, but only to the north right -of -way line, not the north limits of the project.
The project limits include the sidewalk which is shown on the bid documents at
approximately 40f feet north of the right -of -way line. The redesign of the sidewalk moved
the sidewalk to within 10f feet of the right -of -way. The second issue concerns additional
excavation required at the two berms between Sta. 22+00 and Sta.
26+00 ( Creekview
Drive) for the sidewalk construction. Chris Schnitger (SRA) and Philip Bennett (ISI)
discussed this work and it was agreed to be paid at the unit price bid for Unclassified
Roadway Excavation (Bid Item No. 102). The additional excavation was utilized on -site as
backfill for the parkway and construction of the 6 -foot sidewalk.
In our opinion, no additional work was required on the stockpile beyond the project scope
as bid. In regards to the second issue, we do recommend payment for the additional
excavation (333 CY) at the unit price bid (Item No. 102) per discussion with ISI
personnel.
Letter No. 7: Excess Dirt Haul Off -site $68,121.98
This letter claims that ISI was told by SRA that disposal of materials would be
allowed on site. Addendum No. 1 clearly states: "Excess material will need to be disposed
of off -site unless otherwise specified by the Owner". At no time did SRA indicate that
Addendum #1 did not apply.
In our opinion, no additional work was performed beyond the scope as specified
in the Bid Documents.
Letter No. 8: Stock Pond Work $17,894.95
This letter requests money and time for the removal of trees and the placement of
fill dirt. According to the construction plans approximately half of the stock pond required
fill material and tree removal in order to construct Freeport Parkway and the required
grading. It is our understanding that the remainder of the stock pond was filled (with
Owner permission) by the Contractor for his convenience to reduce material to be removed
from the site. The additional tree removal was caused by the Contractors use of the
property to dispose of excess excavation.
In our opinion, no compensation is due for the additional work performed beyond
the scope as specified in the Bid Documents.
If you should have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to
give me a call.
Sincerely,
SCHRICKEL, ROLLINS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Schnitger, P.E.
CS /CS /4126